It's not really interesting, except that it's a glowing endorsement from someone in the games industry, when games are notoriously difficult to do TDD on. That alone makes it a worthwhile data point, if not a worthwhile read

FreakSoftware Wrote:Well if you don't get it, then doesn't that mean you missed the point?

no
it was 3am when i replied, so i didn't explain myself properly.
it should have read:
why wouldn't you unit test? have i missed the point of extreme programming?

but the answer is still yes. i didn't see there was a second page and only read the tdd section.

Quote:XP is not about automated unit-tests, a 40-hour work week, nor is it about pair programming. While most good XP teams do all of those things, they are simply the means to the end of delivering a great product. This is what XP is about â€“ delivering great games.

so, if it's about 'great games', why is it a methodology? surely every(well almost) game dev is focused on making a good game. every dev would have their own way of going about this depending on their project and the collective experiences of the team.

the main point i can see is that the projects design should evolve over the development time. how is it possible not to do this?

Yeah, I misinterpreted that as well. Unit tests, 40 hour work week and pair programming are all in XP, it's just not what XP is all about. They are parts in XP, but the value is greater than the sum of those parts.